[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Getfem-users] Abnormal (?) results in elastostatic test?
From: |
Yves Renard |
Subject: |
Re: [Getfem-users] Abnormal (?) results in elastostatic test? |
Date: |
Wed, 5 Nov 2008 10:54:47 +0100 |
User-agent: |
KMail/1.9.5 |
Dear Artur Pozniak,
In fact, the program elastostatic.cc was used for various tests and its
structure suffers.
In particular here, the parameter FT is used for the definition of the exact
solution (function sol_u, line 68). An exact solution is prescribed to
quantify the approximation error, so the shape of the solution is only due to
the choice of the exact solution.
The selection for Neumann and Dirichlet boundaries is made on line 318 and
after. Indeed in the curent version, the Neumann boundary is the upper face,
and the Dirichlet boundary is the rest of the boundary.
Yves.
On Tuesday 04 November 2008 01:46, Artur Poźniak wrote:
> Dear Developers, Users,
>
> I've noticed (ploting with mayavi (1, 2) and paraview) that results of
> ./elastostatic in tests/ seem a bit strange to me. In elastostatic.cc one
> reads - ,,Neumann boundary on upper face, Dirichlet elsewhere``. I would
> expect lower, right and left face unchanged, while only few points remain
> constrained. I would be pleased if somebody would explain in few words what
> is the meaning of FT parameter, which affects the solution.
> I would appreciate any, even the simpliest checked, workin source file
> dealing
>
> Thanks in advance
> Artur Pozniak
--
Yves Renard (address@hidden) tel : (33) 04.72.43.87.08
Pole de Mathematiques, INSA-Lyon fax : (33) 04.72.43.85.29
20, rue Albert Einstein
69621 Villeurbanne Cedex, FRANCE
http://math.univ-lyon1.fr/~renard
---------